Well - does anyone have a definitive nature of the science of the issue?
I know nothing about nuclear weapons fuel, but I was a nuclear technician in the navy, and I do know that uranium fuel for nuclear reactors, after they are manufactured and ready to be used as fuel for reactors, are not easily converted to nuclear weapons, if at all. And by the way, it is important to note, either way, that the uranium in fuel rods for nuclear reactors is already enriched.
If these fuel rods - which is, in my understanding, what some are proposing to sell to Iran and other countries - cannot be converted to nuclear weapons fuel, then this would be an excellent idea. It is my understanding that these fuel rods cannot be reprocessed into nuclear weapons, but then again, I have been out of the field for 7 years. There are also many other reactor fuel rod constructions besides the naval design, and I cannot speak about those, either.
Obviously, the bottom line is that no one can debate this intelligently until a couple of things are made clear. One would need to know what exactly Kerry and others are proposing to sell to countries like Iran, and one would also need to know, definitively, how feasible converting this material to weapons grade fuel is.
Let's not jump to conclusions like liberals do. If whatever they are talking about is tamperproof, then it sounds like a perfect way to eliminate the rogue countries' using "the peaceful application of nuclear technology research" as a cover for developing nuclear weapons. If we sell them what they want, and it's truly tamperproof, then I cannot see a downside to this. Again, first, we need to answer those 2 questions before we can discuss it intelligently.